A DARLINGTON market trader convicted of a string of credit card frauds has won the first stage of his fight to clear his name.

Stuart Bell, 43, was convicted of 11 counts of fraud at Teesside Crown Court in May last year.

However, he has always claimed it was not him, but a man called Raj Singh, who was behind the scam.

Yesterday, (Thursday, January 15) the case reached the Court of Appeal in London, where three top judges said he had an arguable case his conviction is 'unsafe'.

The court heard Bell, who ran a mobile phone accessory business in Darlington's covered market, was accused of frauds totalling £133,765.

The prosecution alleged he made 52 bogus credit card refunds, paying the cash into his bank accounts and others he was linked to.

Bell, of Brunel Way, Darlington, denied any wrongdoing, saying the transactions were actually carried out by the mysterious Mr Singh.

His trial heard the false transactions were made after cards belonging to Bell were swiped using the businesses's chip and pin machine.

In each instance fraudulent refunds were made to the respective credit card accounts with no corresponding purchases having been made by customers.

The court heard that a further £68,000 worth of refund transactions were stopped once the six figure fraud was uncovered.

Bell said he was not responsible and that the cards in question had been used by Mr Singh who took over the business. The prosecution said there was no evidence Mr Singh existed

The jury found him guilty and he was convicted. Sentence is still pending.

Yesterday, his lawyers argued at London's Court of Appeal that the jury had potentially got it wrong.

The way the trial judge had told the jury to consider the case was different to the way it had been presented by the prosecution, it was argued.

Giving judgment, Mr Justice Walker, Lord Justice Fulford and Mr Justice Flaux said Bell had an 'arguable' case.

'We are persuaded that permission to appeal against conviction should be granted,' said Mr Justice Walker.

'The matter will therefore proceed to full argument.'

No date was set for the full appeal to be heard.